What are the problems of accessing Application context via static method [duplicate] - java

In an Android app, is there anything wrong with the following approach:
public class MyApp extends android.app.Application {
private static MyApp instance;
public MyApp() {
instance = this;
}
public static Context getContext() {
return instance;
}
}
and pass it everywhere (e.g. SQLiteOpenHelper) where context is required (and not leaking of course)?

There are a couple of potential problems with this approach, though in a lot of circumstances (such as your example) it will work well.
In particular you should be careful when dealing with anything that deals with the GUI that requires a Context. For example, if you pass the application Context into the LayoutInflater you will get an Exception. Generally speaking, your approach is excellent: it's good practice to use an Activity's Context within that Activity, and the Application Context when passing a context beyond the scope of an Activity to avoid memory leaks.
Also, as an alternative to your pattern you can use the shortcut of calling getApplicationContext() on a Context object (such as an Activity) to get the Application Context.

In my experience this approach shouldn't be necessary. If you need the context for anything you can usually get it via a call to View.getContext() and using the Context obtained there you can call Context.getApplicationContext() to get the Application context. If you are trying to get the Application context this from an Activity you can always call Activity.getApplication() which should be able to be passed as the Context needed for a call to SQLiteOpenHelper().
Overall there doesn't seem to be a problem with your approach for this situation, but when dealing with Context just make sure you are not leaking memory anywhere as described on the official Google Android Developers blog.

Some people have asked: how can the singleton return a null pointer?
I'm answering that question. (I cannot answer in a comment because I need to post code.)
It may return null in between two events: (1) the class is loaded, and (2) the object of this class is created. Here's an example:
class X {
static X xinstance;
static Y yinstance = Y.yinstance;
X() {xinstance=this;}
}
class Y {
static X xinstance = X.xinstance;
static Y yinstance;
Y() {yinstance=this;}
}
public class A {
public static void main(String[] p) {
X x = new X();
Y y = new Y();
System.out.println("x:"+X.xinstance+" y:"+Y.yinstance);
System.out.println("x:"+Y.xinstance+" y:"+X.yinstance);
}
}
Let's run the code:
$ javac A.java
$ java A
x:X#a63599 y:Y#9036e
x:null y:null
The second line shows that Y.xinstance and X.yinstance are null; they are null because the variables X.xinstance ans Y.yinstance were read when they were null.
Can this be fixed? Yes,
class X {
static Y y = Y.getInstance();
static X theinstance;
static X getInstance() {if(theinstance==null) {theinstance = new X();} return theinstance;}
}
class Y {
static X x = X.getInstance();
static Y theinstance;
static Y getInstance() {if(theinstance==null) {theinstance = new Y();} return theinstance;}
}
public class A {
public static void main(String[] p) {
System.out.println("x:"+X.getInstance()+" y:"+Y.getInstance());
System.out.println("x:"+Y.x+" y:"+X.y);
}
}
and this code shows no anomaly:
$ javac A.java
$ java A
x:X#1c059f6 y:Y#152506e
x:X#1c059f6 y:Y#152506e
BUT this is not an option for the Android Application object: the programmer does not control the time when it is created.
Once again: the difference between the first example and the second one is that the second example creates an instance if the static pointer is null. But a programmer cannot create the Android application object before the system decides to do it.
UPDATE
One more puzzling example where initialized static fields happen to be null.
Main.java:
enum MyEnum {
FIRST,SECOND;
private static String prefix="<", suffix=">";
String myName;
MyEnum() {
myName = makeMyName();
}
String makeMyName() {
return prefix + name() + suffix;
}
String getMyName() {
return myName;
}
}
public class Main {
public static void main(String args[]) {
System.out.println("first: "+MyEnum.FIRST+" second: "+MyEnum.SECOND);
System.out.println("first: "+MyEnum.FIRST.makeMyName()+" second: "+MyEnum.SECOND.makeMyName());
System.out.println("first: "+MyEnum.FIRST.getMyName()+" second: "+MyEnum.SECOND.getMyName());
}
}
And you get:
$ javac Main.java
$ java Main
first: FIRST second: SECOND
first: <FIRST> second: <SECOND>
first: nullFIRSTnull second: nullSECONDnull
Note that you cannot move the static variable declaration one line upper, the code will not compile.

Application Class:
import android.app.Application;
import android.content.Context;
public class MyApplication extends Application {
private static Context mContext;
public void onCreate() {
super.onCreate();
mContext = getApplicationContext();
}
public static Context getAppContext() {
return mContext;
}
}
Declare the Application in the AndroidManifest:
<application android:name=".MyApplication"
...
/>
Usage:
MyApplication.getAppContext()

You are trying to create a wrapper to get Application Context and there is a possibility that it might return "null" pointer.
As per my understanding, I guess its better approach to call- any of the 2
Context.getApplicationContext() or Activity.getApplication().

It is a good approach. I use it myself as well. I would only suggest to override onCreate to set the singleton instead of using a constructor.
And since you mentioned SQLiteOpenHelper: In onCreate () you can open the database as well.
Personally I think the documentation got it wrong in saying that There is normally no need to subclass Application. I think the opposite is true: You should always subclass Application.

I would use Application Context to get a System Service in the constructor. This eases testing & benefits from composition
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
private final NotificationManager notificationManager;
public MyActivity() {
this(MyApp.getContext().getSystemService(NOTIFICATION_SERVICE));
}
public MyActivity(NotificationManager notificationManager) {
this.notificationManager = notificationManager;
}
// onCreate etc
}
Test class would then use the overloaded constructor.
Android would use the default constructor.

I like it, but I would suggest a singleton instead:
package com.mobidrone;
import android.app.Application;
import android.content.Context;
public class ApplicationContext extends Application
{
private static ApplicationContext instance = null;
private ApplicationContext()
{
instance = this;
}
public static Context getInstance()
{
if (null == instance)
{
instance = new ApplicationContext();
}
return instance;
}
}

I'm using the same approach, I suggest to write the singleton a little better:
public static MyApp getInstance() {
if (instance == null) {
synchronized (MyApp.class) {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new MyApp ();
}
}
}
return instance;
}
but I'm not using everywhere, I use getContext() and getApplicationContext() where I can do it!

I know the original question was posted 13 years ago, and this is the Kotlin version of getting context everywhere.
class MyApplication : Application() {
companion object {
#JvmStatic
private var instance: MyApplication? = null
#JvmStatic
public final fun getContext(): Context? {
return instance
}
}
override fun onCreate() {
instance = this
super.onCreate()
}
}

Related

Want to call a non-static Interface method in a static method. How?

I facing a real hard problem in my code snippet.
I want to learn how to use Interface in Java the correct way.
So for this I have my Application-Class...
package inversionUsage;
public class Application {
public static void main(String [] args) {
String standard = "Standard version!";
if (FeatureDecisions.checkEnabledFeatures("new-feature1")) {
System.out.println("Implement new feature...");
}else {
System.out.println(standard);
}
}
}
Then I made a Interface...
package inversionUsage;
public interface AppConfiguration {
boolean isEnabled(String searchFeature);
}
I want to use the Interface in another class:
package inversionUsage;
import java.util.Arrays;
public class FeatureDecisions implements AppConfiguration{
public String [] enabledFeatures;
public String [] _implNewFeature = fetchFeatureTogglesFromSomehere();
public static boolean checkEnabledFeatures(String searchFeature) {
return isEnabled(searchFeature);
}
#Override
public boolean isEnabled(String searchFeature) {
if (Arrays.asList(_implNewFeature).contains(searchFeature)) {
return true;
}else {
return false;
}
}
private String [] fetchFeatureTogglesFromSomehere() {
// TODO get the CONFIG from somewhere
enabledFeatures = new String [2];
enabledFeatures[0] = "new-feature1";
enabledFeatures[1] = "new-feature2";
return enabledFeatures;
}
}
So the workflow is:
1. I start the Application
2. Main method checks the enabled features via FeatureDecisions.java
3. In Feature Decisions i implemented the Interface
I getting the error:
Cannot make a static reference to the non-static method isEnabled(String) from the type FeatureDecisions
May Someone can help me out?
The only way to use an instance method is to have an instance on which to call it. Your checkEnabledFeatures is static, so it doesn't receive an instance you can use (as this). To use an instance method, it would need to create an instance. But obviously that's not what you want here.
Java's interface construct is for defining the interface that instances implement. Java doesn't have the concept of a "static interface" that a class must implement. On the rare occasions when that's needed, it's usually implemented using reflection (perhaps with a class-level annotation to indicate that the class has the necessary feature).
You would have to instantiate the FeatureDecisions class.
public static boolean checkEnabledFeatures(String searchFeature) {
return new FeatureDecisions().isEnabled(searchFeature);
}
or make all members static.
Additional info: There are frameworks like togglz that do this for you.
There's no way to do that. The closest can get is to use the singleton pattern (though lots of people - myself included - would discourage it).
public enum FeatureDecisions implements AppConfiguration
{
INSTANCE;
public String [] enabledFeatures;
public String [] _implNewFeature = fetchFeatureTogglesFromSomehere();
public boolean checkEnabledFeatures(String searchFeature) {
return isEnabled(searchFeature);
}
#Override
public boolean isEnabled(String searchFeature) {
//...
}
}
Your call would then change from:
FeatureDecisions.checkEnabledFeatures(...)
to
FeatureDecisions.INSTANCE.checkEnabledFeatures(...)
It's also worth noting that checkEnabledFeatures doesn't actually do anything besides defer to isEnabled. You could scrap the former and just call the latter directly.

Creating instance of an object globally (outside the constructor or any methods)

I came across this class while going through a project my senior worked on. I am trying to understand if this code will work correctly, since this appears a little fishy.
Here the DataStore class object is being instantiated at global level, I am not sure how that works?
I understand that this is a singleton class but when will such a global object be created? Is it guaranteed that mContext passed to DataStore will always be non-null?
public class DataFetcher {
public DatStore dataStore = new DataStore(mContext, "DATA");
private DataFetcher() {
}
private static class SingletonHelper {
private static final DataFetcher INSTANCE = new DataFetcher();
}
public static DataFetcher getInstance(Context context) {
mContext = context;
return SingletonHelper.INSTANCE;
}
// Rest of the code skipped
}
Thanks !!
I can't tell if you're an educator or a student. In neither case should code like this be encouraged.
Google has gone to great lengths to find and remove singletons from their code base. I would not encourage students to use them.
Even if I thought a singleton was necessary, I would say this example is unnecessarily complex and opaque. There's no need for a helper or other machinery. This is sufficient:
public class Singleton {
private static final Singleton instance = new Singleton();
private Singleton() {}
public static Singleton getInstance() { return instance; }
}
I've never understood a lazy instantiated Singleton. If you know it'll be used, why wait?

Java Singleton Methods not Working

Hey guys I am not seeing what I am doing wrong here. I am currently following this tutorial on how to implement the Singleton Pattern for a project and I set up some test files to see if it would work out well with what I'm doing, and as far as I can tell I am following the pattern perfectly and yet I can't seem to access ANY of the methods, this is the third time I've set this up in various ways, and as this is the simplest setup and it still doesn't work right, I am in the dark on whats going on here. I just need what I'm doing wrong here pointed out if at all possible. Here is the code:
DCTest.java (the Singleton Class)
package com.saphiric.simproject.datacontrols;
/**
* Created by Saphiric on 12/30/14.
*/
public class DCTest {
// Singleton Test
private static DCTest dct = new DCTest();
private DCTest(){
// Prevents outside instantiation
}
public static DCTest getInstance(){
return dct;
}
// test variables for making sure it can have dynamic fields
private int INT;
protected void setInt(int newInt){
INT = newInt;
}
protected int getINT(){
return INT;
}
}
DataCore.java (The file I want to access the Singleton Class)
package com.saphiric.simproject.datacontrols;
/**
* Created by Saphiric on 12/29/14.
*/
public class DataCore {
// Singletons Tests
DCTest test = DCTest.getInstance();
test.setInt(0);
public DataController data = new DataController();
public DecisionLocks locks = new DecisionLocks();
}
Your issue is that method calls in Java have to be in a method. So the issue you're having actually has little to do with the Singleton pattern at all, it's that you're trying to make a call in the body of a class, rather than a method. If you tried to compile the following you'd have the same error:
public class HelloWorld{
System.out.println("Hello, World!"); //Err
}
The solution to your problem depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
If you're trying to call setInt(0) at the class load time of the DataCore class (and test was supposed to be a static field), use a static initializer (just the word static instead of a method header) for that statement.
public class DataCore {
// Singletons Tests - static
static DCTest test;
//Called when the DataCore class is loaded.
static{
test = DCTest.getInstance();
test.setInt(0);
}
}
Alternatively, if the field test is actually supposed to be non-static, simply put the setInt call in a constructor:
public class DataCore {
// Singletons Tests - nonstatic
DCTest test;
public DataCore(){
test = DCTest.getInstance();
test.setInt(0);
}
}
Enclose your code of DataCore class into a method.
public class DataCore {
// Singletons Tests
public void work () { // added code in this method.
DCTest test = DCTest.getInstance();
test.setInt(0);
public DataController data = new DataController();
public DecisionLocks locks = new DecisionLocks();
}
}

Java - make class static instead of one instance of it

Let's say i have a class, and I made only one instance of it and i don't need more than that.
Should i just make the class static ? (not the class itself but the functions and the variables).
In the example below should i make the class static if i won't make more than one instance of it ?
public class Foo {
int num1;
int num2;
public void func() {
// Something in here
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Foo bar = new Foo(); //I don't need more than one instance of that class.
}
If your class has no state, say:
class NoState {
static int sum(int i1, int i2) { return i1 + i2; }
}
then it makes sense to use static methods.
If you must ensure that there is only one instance of your class, then you could use a singleton, but be careful: global state can be evil.
Not as bad as a singleton, you could use static fields/methods: it can be useful is some situations but should not be abused.
In any other situations (= most of the time), just use normal instance variables/methods.
You can use an enum to define a singleton.
public enum Foo {
INSTANCE;
int num1;
int num2;
public void func() {
// Something in here
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Foo bar = Foo.INSTANCE;
}
However, this is only need if you want to enforce one instance. Otherwise, I would just use new Foo(); and call it only once, if you only need one.
You can use Singleton. However, make sure if Singleton is what is really required - sometimes singletons gets overused where simple class with static methods might suffice. There are many ways to create singleton as explained What is an efficient way to implement a singleton pattern in Java?
Note that with Java 5, enum is the preferred way to create singleton.
You say that i don't need more than that so my answer is that not make more than one and if you really like to enforce the instance that it should be only one for class then use the enum best way to implement the singleton in java
for example in datasource one really needs singleton
public enum UserActivity {
INSTANCE;
private DataSource dataSource;
private JdbcTemplate jdbcTemplate;
private UserActivity() {
this.dataSource = MysqlDb.getInstance().getDataSource();
this.jdbcTemplate = new JdbcTemplate(this.dataSource);
}
public void dostuff() {
...
}
}
and if you really need that then use it otherwise go with your current logic
A class that must be instantiated once and only once, is called a singleton. That knowledge should help you narrow down your search for information. To give you a head start:
Difference between static class and singleton pattern?
Why use a singleton instead of static methods?
Basically static methods and fields means that you don't need any instances of the class.
In you case you need 'singleton' class, you can either use enum or make it a singleton by yourself, using the specific set of rules.
It really depends on the scope of your application. If you want this object to be used as a singleton you would provide a static method to get the one and only instance of the class.
public class Foo
{
private static Foo instance ....
private Foo()
{
.....
}
public static Foo getInstance()
{
return instance;
}
}
If you plan to use a framework like spring you would just add one object to the application context.
<bean class="....Foo" id="fooInstance" scope="singleton">
....
</bean>
But maybe, you can refractor this class to hold only static methods. Then you can mark the class as final and provide a private constructor.
public final class Utils
{
private Utils(){}
public static .... doFoo(....)
{
....
}
}

Global variables in Java

How do you define Global variables in Java ?
To define Global Variable you can make use of static Keyword
public class Example {
public static int a;
public static int b;
}
now you can access a and b from anywhere
by calling
Example.a;
Example.b;
You don't. That's by design. You shouldn't do it even if you could.
That being said you could create a set of public static members in a class named Globals.
public class Globals {
public static int globalInt = 0;
///
}
but you really shouldn't :). Seriously .. don't do it.
Another way is to create an interface like this:
public interface GlobalConstants
{
String name = "Chilly Billy";
String address = "10 Chicken head Lane";
}
Any class that needs to use them only has to implement the interface:
public class GlobalImpl implements GlobalConstants
{
public GlobalImpl()
{
System.out.println(name);
}
}
You are better off using dependency injection:
public class Globals {
public int a;
public int b;
}
public class UsesGlobals {
private final Globals globals;
public UsesGlobals(Globals globals) {
this.globals = globals;
}
}
Lots of good answers, but I want to give this example as it's considered the more proper way to access variables of a class by another class: using getters and setters.
The reason why you use getters and setters this way instead of just making the variable public is as follows. Lets say your var is going to be a global parameter that you NEVER want someone to change during the execution of your program (in the case when you are developing code with a team), something like maybe the URL for a website. In theory this could change and may be used many times in your program, so you want to use a global var to be able to update it all at once. But you do not want someone else to go in and change this var (possibly without realizing how important it is). In that case you simply do not include a setter method, and only include the getter method.
public class Global{
private static int var = 5;
public static int getVar(){
return Global.var;
}
//If you do not want to change the var ever then do not include this
public static void setVar(int var){
Global.var = var;
}
}
Truly speaking there is not a concept of "GLOBAL" in a java OO program
Nevertheless there is some truth behind your question because there will be some cases where you want to run a method at any part of the program.
For example---random() method in Phrase-O-Matic app;it is a method should be callable from anywhere of a program.
So in order to satisfy the things like Above "We need to have Global-like variables and methods"
TO DECLARE A VARIABLE AS GLOBAL.
1.Mark the variable as public static final While declaring.
TO DECLARE A METHOD AS GLOBAL.
1. Mark the method as public static While declaring.
Because I declared global variables and method as static you can call them anywhere you wish by simply with the help of following code
ClassName.X
NOTE: X can be either method name or variable name as per the requirement and ClassName is the name of the class in which you declared them.
There is no global variable in Java
Nevertheless, what we do have is a static keyword and that is all we need.
Nothing exists outside of class in Java. The static keyword represents a class variable that, contrary to instance variable, only has one copy and that transcends across all the instances of that class created, which means that its value can be changed and accessed across all instances at any point.
If you need a global variable which can be accessed beyond scopes, then this is the variable that you need, but its scope exists only where the class is, and that will be all.
Nothing should be global, except for constants.
public class MyMainClass {
public final static boolean DEBUGMODE=true;
}
Put this within your main class. In other .java files, use it through:
if(MyMainClass.DEBUGMODE) System.out.println("Some debugging info");
Make sure when you move your code off the cutting room floor and into release you remove or comment out this functionality.
If you have a workhorse method, like a randomizer, I suggest creating a "Toolbox" package! All coders should have one, then whenever you want to use it in a .java, just import it!
There is no such thing as a truly global variable in Java. Every static variable must belong to some class (like System.out), but when you have decided which class it will go in, you can refer to it from everywhere loaded by the same classloader.
Note that static variables should always be protected when updating to avoid race conditions.
Understanding the problem
I consider the qualification of global variable as a variable that could be accessed and changed anywhere in the code without caring about static/instance call or passing any reference from one class to another.
Usually if you have class A
public class A {
private int myVar;
public A(int myVar) {
this.myVar = myVar;
}
public int getMyVar() {
return myVar;
}
public void setMyVar(int mewVar) {
this.myVar = newVar;
}
}
and want to access and update myvar in a class B,
public class B{
private A a;
public void passA(A a){
this.a = a;
}
public void changeMyVar(int newVar){
a.setMyvar(newVar);
}
}
you will need to have a reference of an instance of the class A and update the value in the class B like this:
int initialValue = 2;
int newValue = 3;
A a = new A(initialValue);
B b = new B();
b.passA(a);
b.changeMyVar(newValue);
assertEquals(a.getMyVar(),newValue); // true
Solution
So my solution to this, (even if i'm not sure if it's a good practice), is to use a singleton:
public class Globals {
private static Globals globalsInstance = new Globals();
public static Globals getInstance() {
return globalsInstance;
}
private int myVar = 2;
private Globals() {
}
public int getMyVar() {
return myVar;
}
public void setMyVar(int myVar) {
this.myVar = myVar;
}
}
Now you can get the Global unique instance anywhere with:
Globals globals = Globals.getInstance();
// and read and write to myVar with the getter and setter like
int myVar = globals.getMyVar();
global.setMyVar(3);
public class GlobalClass {
public static int x = 37;
public static String s = "aaa";
}
This way you can access them with GlobalClass.x and GlobalClass.s
If you need to update global property, a simple getter/setter wrapper class can be used as global variable. A typical example is shown below.
public class GlobalHolder {
private static final GlobalHolder INSTANCE = new GlobalHolder();
private volatile int globalProperty;
public static GlobalHolder getInstance() {
return INSTANCE;
}
public int getGlobalProperty() {
return globalProperty;
}
public void setGlobalProperty(int globalProperty) {
this.globalProperty = globalProperty;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
GlobalHolder.getInstance().setGlobalProperty(10);
System.out.println(GlobalHolder.getInstance().getGlobalProperty());
}
}
public class GlobalImpl {
public static int global = 5;
}
you can call anywhere you want:
GlobalImpl.global // 5
Creating an independent file, eg. Example.java to use the 1st solution, is just fine. You can do that also within the app, if e.g. the global variables are special to your current app, etc.:
Create a class at the beginning and declare your variables in there:
class Globals {
static int month_number;
static String month_name;
}
You can then access these variables -- using them as 'Globals.month_number', etc. -- from averywhere in your app.
very simple:
class UseOfGlobal
{
private static int a;
private static int b;
}
but it is always good to have local variables defined inside method blocks where ever possible.
As you probably guess from the answer there is no global variables in Java and the only thing you can do is to create a class with static members:
public class Global {
public static int a;
}
You can use it with Global.a elsewhere. However if you use Java 1.5 or better you can use the import static magic to make it look even more as a real global variable:
import static test.Global.*;
public class UseGlobal {
public void foo() {
int i = a;
}
}
And voilà!
Now this is far from a best practice so as you can see in the commercials: don't do this at home
There are no global variables in Java, but there are global classes with public fields. You can use static import feature of java 5 to make it look almost like global variables.
Generally Global variable (I assume you are comparing it with C,Cpp) define as public static final
like
class GlobalConstant{
public static final String CODE = "cd";
}
ENUMs are also useful in such scenario :
For Example Calendar.JANUARY)
To allow an unqualified access to static members of another class, you can also do a static import:
import static my.package.GlobalConstants;
Now, instead of print(GlobalConstants.MY_PASSWORD);
you can use the Constant directly: print(MY_PASSWORD);
See What does the "static" modifier after "import" mean? to decide about.
And consider the answer of Evan Lévesque about interfaces to carry the Constants.
// Get the access of global while retaining priveleges.
// You can access variables in one class from another, with provisions.
// The primitive must be protected or no modifier (seen in example).
// the first class
public class farm{
int eggs; // an integer to be set by constructor
fox afox; // declaration of a fox object
// the constructor inits
farm(){
eggs = 4;
afox = new fox(); // an instance of a fox object
// show count of eggs before the fox arrives
System.out.println("Count of eggs before: " + eggs);
// call class fox, afox method, pass myFarm as a reference
afox.stealEgg(this);
// show the farm class, myFarm, primitive value
System.out.println("Count of eggs after : " + eggs);
} // end constructor
public static void main(String[] args){
// instance of a farm class object
farm myFarm = new farm();
}; // end main
} // end class
// the second class
public class fox{
// theFarm is the myFarm object instance
// any public, protected, or "no modifier" variable is accessible
void stealEgg(farm theFarm){ --theFarm.eggs; }
} // end class
Going by the concept, global variables, also known as instance variable are the class level variables,i.e., they are defined inside a class but outside methods. In order to make them available completely and use them directly provide the static keyword.
So if i am writing a program for simple arithmetical operation and it requires a number pair then two instance variables are defined as such:
public class Add {
static int a;
static int b;
static int c;
public static void main(String arg[]) {
c=sum();
System.out.println("Sum is: "+c);
}
static int sum() {
a=20;
b=30;
return a+b;
}
}
Output: Sum is: 50
Moreover using static keyword prior to the instance variables enable us not to specify datatypes for same variables again and again. Just write the variable directly.
In general, Java doesn't have any global variables. Other than local variables, all variables comes under the scope of any class defined in the program.
We can have static variables to have the scope of global variables.
without static this is possible too:
class Main {
String globalVar = "Global Value";
class Class1 {
Class1() {
System.out.println("Class1: "+globalVar);
globalVar += " - changed";
} }
class Class2 {
Class2() {
System.out.println("Class2: "+globalVar);
} }
public static void main(String[] args) {
Main m = new Main();
m.mainCode();
}
void mainCode() {
Class1 o1 = new Class1();
Class2 o2 = new Class2();
}
}
/*
Output:
Class1: Global Value
Class2: Global Value - changed
*/
Object-Oriented Programming is built with the understanding that the scope of variables is closely exclusive to the class object that encapsulates those variables.
The problem with creating "global variables" is that it's not industry standard for Java. It's not industry standard because it allows multiple classes to manipulate data asyncronized, if you're running a multi-threaded application, this gets a little more complicated and dangerous in terms of thread-safety. There are various other reasons why using global variables are ineffective, but if you want to avoid that, I suggest you resort to Aspect-Oriented Programming.
Aspect-Oriented Programming negates this problem by putting the parent class in charge of the scope through something called "advices", which adds additional behavior to the code without actually modifying it. It offers solutions to cross-cutting concerns, or global variable usage.
Spring is a Java framework that utilizes AOP, and while it is traditionally used for web-applications, the core application can be used universally throughout the Java framework (8.0 included). This might be a direction you want to explore more.
To define Global Variable you can make use of static Keyword
public final class Tools {
public static int a;
public static int b;
}
now you can access a and b from anywhere by calling
Tools.a;
Tools.b;
Yoy are right...specially in J2ME...
You can avoid NullPointerException by putting inside your MidLet constructor
(proggy initialization) this line of code:
new Tools();
This ensures that Tools will be allocated before any instruction
that uses it.
That's it!

Categories